61 comments:

"As the chief of staff, Ms. Pierson is the agency’s highest-ranking female special agent and has worked for the agency for three decades. She has worked as a field agent and in a variety of management positions involving human resources, cybercrime and antidrug operations, and she has overseen the presidential and vice-presidential protective divisions."

She's seen the agency from different perspectives, which is what I find valuable.

From what we read, there is nothing to assume that she isn't qualified. It seems like a non-story. Now, if she had come in from outside, with no detailed operational knowledge or expertise in the sort of things the Secret Service does, then there'd be a big concern.

However, if she (like the NASA administrator) says that part of her job mission is Muslim outreach, then we've got a big problem.

____________ [name of newly anointed bureaucrat] is eminently qualified [list credentials), has led an exemplary career in _____________ [describe public service], and exemplifies the spirit of the ______________ [official name of bureaucracy here, no initials] which ___________________________ [describe ostensible bureaucratic mission].

WTP? She's either good enough to head the agency, or she's not. It's certainly not in the best interest of Obama or his family to appoint someone unqualified, so it seems reasonably likely that she's every bit good enough.

In the past weeks 4 women in my office, who I rarely have spoken to, have mentioned their "wives" and "children". Disgusting. I didn't know they were dykes but now I do and would prefer they keep that shit to themselves.

They are all really thin and pretty too. What a waste.

I am beginning to wonder if there are any real women in my office who love the cock.

How utterly stupid. There are certain physiological differences which distinguish between men and women, which inherently limit capability. She needs to meet the qualifications of the position, including: mental, emotional, and physical requirements.

I wonder what other distractions Obama and friends will concoct in order to encourage people to forget their illegal, exploitative, and discriminatory activities.

He is like a celebrity who hides their transgressions through symbolic gestures of charity. The JournoLists love these human interest stories.

One of the dykes biked all the way from JP (lesbian capitol) in a sheer tight top which highlighted her sweaty pouting tits-the nipples sweat was penetrating the white top and you could see the entire width of the large purple erect sweating tit. I saw the corona of the nipple-stitches and all.

Be paid weekly and earn like a boss. I just bought a great Chrysler, from earning $9844 this last 4 weeks and $10k last month. Its by far the easiest and without any doubt the most financially rewarding job I've ever had. I actually started ten months ago, and practically, straight away got at least $81p/h! This is what I do - www.Epic2.com

If it involves a women, a gay or a minority then it's a story. Frankly, and I mean this in a purely non-partisan way, I'm sick of the hoo-hah about these " historic firsts". All they usually do is prove that women and minorities are as catastrophically incompetent, corrupt, and self-interested as any white man.

If it involves a women, a gay or a minority then it's a story. Frankly, and I mean this in a purely non-partisan way, I'm sick of the hoo-hah about these " historic firsts". All they usually do is prove that women and minorities are as catastrophically incompetent, corrupt, and self-interested as any white man.

All they usually do is prove that women and minorities are seen by Lefists as catastrophically incompetent, corrupt, and in need of special help because, otherwise, they couldn't get a job as dogcatcher.

Being qualified is not important anymore when the president himself is an affirmative action hire and barely experienced enough to supervise a city playground.

You know, that comment might have some bite if it came from someone who is in the universe of people who make decisions on what constitutes qualification for anything noteworthy. But I think it's safe to assume that AJ Lynch isn't someone who's amounted to much, so no harm and no foul.

can a woman lead the secret service? absolutely.women have run countries, some of them even ran them well. so why not an agency?

Can THIS woman run the secret service? that remains to seen. because Obama appointed her I'm skeptical, though in truth I dont know much about her. maybe this is one of those instances where he got it right.

Little Sis will compliment Big Sis nicely. Sure, given her personnel duties she is really the one that actually made the calls that led to all the embarrassments, not the top guy. And no one is disputing that change starts at the top. But that change usually doesn't reward the person responsible for the problems or the lack of oversight that would have prevented the scandals in the first place.

What was her first public statement? That you don't need guys built like linebackers to serve on protection details. Right. Just spend some time at a busy bar that hires 5'6" bouncers. And duck.

"You know, that comment might have some bite if it came from someone..."

It is either true or it's not, regardless of who says it. Was he qualified to run the biggest, most powerful organization that has ever existed in the world after never running anything before? You decide. Oh wait, you already did. Well done, brilliant, bravo!

Actually, if you delve in to the procedures at the Civilian Personnel Office (CPOL) for the military, not to mention Office of Personnel Management (OPM), for screening and reviewing resumes you would find your hypothesis is quite correct....and use of such wording is necessary.

The key words aspect of the computer program that first screens a resume will look for words from the position description that describe functions. By the time the review reaches a human the "skills" have been identified and said human will argue that...even if the resume writer is 100% BS'ing, with half truths that imply a skill by including the word(s) required, but are not functions actually ever performed.

It IS one of the biggest hurdles in hiring there is in government...except for senior executive positions, where political suck-uppence is all that is required and no skills preferred.

In this SS lady's case...sounds to me like they are breaking the rules, unless she's someone who has moved around the agency because she wasn't performing in any of her positions. That IS the career track of many SES personnel.

No way for me to know that in this case...but if I were the reviewer, I'd be looking at the quantifiable accomplishments and qualitative aspects of prior decisions she has made. If her resume had 75%+ of Job Description key words, I'd be v-e-r-y leery....if federal service, if you are smart, you build your resume over time for the position description that you want down the line.

At the level Ms Pierson is at there is no need for anyone to establish she is qualified beyond saying so. Any criticism had better be substantial, not trite.